So my question is when will Cindy Manning be voted on? If her term is up in June does that mean she will get to stay until next May?

I very mush applaud the wome who stepped down when clearly it should have been Manning, those members that have to work with her you have your work cut out as she seems very bitter.

Please old and new members remember it is not a personal attack it is about the animals and it is just too bad that it had to come to this. You have the communities attention so I am very much looking for the new ideas that are sure to come and how I can help.

Unless she quits, she will be there until the next members meeting in May 2012, I agree that she seemed bitter and I was hoping the woman that put herself up for re- election(removal) had been the one to stay on, I thought she was a class act .

in this week's Flume article, it states that there was a vacant seat left by the recent resignation of Dr Palmini. "David O'Brien, Cappy O'Brien, Wendy Kelsey-Newman, Steve Kelsey, and Lynn Stockton were overwhelmingly elected to two-year positions on the board, beating incumbents Sharon Winterrowd and Sherry Lightcalf. Of the three vacant seats, the most recent was created when Conifer veterinarian David Palmini left the board"

On the whiteboard voting photo, it shows that his name was up for reelection. Can someone explain this?

in this week's Flume article, it states that there was a vacant seat left by the recent resignation of Dr Palmini. "David O'Brien, Cappy O'Brien, Wendy Kelsey-Newman, Steve Kelsey, and Lynn Stockton were overwhelmingly elected to two-year positions on the board, beating incumbents Sharon Winterrowd and Sherry Lightcalf. Of the three vacant seats, the most recent was created when Conifer veterinarian David Palmini left the board"

On the whiteboard voting photo, it shows that his name was up for reelection. Can someone explain this?

My understanding was he was never elected and vacated his seat. I have the utmost respect for Dr. Palmini's skills and he was a class act in the whole process.I believe his name was there to meet the bylaw requirements.

His name was added to the list of director seats up for a vote during the annual members' meeting. The then-current board requested a break in the meeting for them to have a quick meeting to discuss if/which positions would be added to the distributed ballot. When they returned, they announced that his seat was being added to the ballot.

This is why you saw his name on the white board. The 5 director seats that ended up on the ballot for this year's members meeting were the 2 vacant seats and the three that were currently filled by Sherry Lightcap, Dr. Palmini, and Sharon Winterrowd. Sharon ended up volunteering to have her name added after they had returned from their side meeting and the members were inquiring about the 5th director's seat that should have been up for a vote.

I don't know who the Flume reporter interviewed that provided him with that information about Dr. Palmini's seat. I know there were a few other items in his article that were misinterpreted or misunderstood but for the most part it was accurate. I was surprised that he quoted Cindy Manning's comment made in the Members' meeting that 99% of the members in attendance had never volunteered or been there before that evening. I know most of the members there had either/both volunteered in some way at the shelter (some in past years), donated, fostered, and/or adopted their pets from the shelter. The reporter was told this but it seems he decided not to include it in the article.

Sorry everybody. It has been a busy 10 days since the night of the vote. I know there is an interest in having a presence here on the site by the organization. I think it will be happening pretty soon.

<snip> I was surprised that he quoted Cindy Manning's comment made in the Members' meeting that 99% of the members in attendance had never volunteered or been there before that evening. I know most of the members there had either/both volunteered in some way at the shelter (some in past years), donated, fostered, and/or adopted their pets from the shelter. The reporter was told this but it seems he decided not to include it in the article.

<snip>

Yeah - that comment kinda made me mad. It was a bad generalization. I know I have volunteered for the shelter a touch, and I have a vested interest in pets. I think she was just mad that they were being called on their decisions. Well, I think that was just too bad. The bottom line is the community spoke. There were a a lot of us that wondered why they had put all of those cats down. Especially w/o asking for help. To be honest - I am sorry the one gal gave up here seat instead of Cindy. That's my $.02

<snip> I was surprised that he quoted Cindy Manning's comment made in the Members' meeting that 99% of the members in attendance had never volunteered or been there before that evening. I know most of the members there had either/both volunteered in some way at the shelter (some in past years), donated, fostered, and/or adopted their pets from the shelter. The reporter was told this but it seems he decided not to include it in the article.

<snip>

Yeah - that comment kinda made me mad. It was a bad generalization. I know I have volunteered for the shelter a touch, and I have a vested interest in pets. I think she was just mad that they were being called on their decisions. Well, I think that was just too bad. The bottom line is the community spoke. There were a a lot of us that wondered why they had put all of those cats down. Especially w/o asking for help. To be honest - I am sorry the one gal gave up here seat instead of Cindy. That's my $.02

I agree 100% . Everyone that I knew there ,about 1/3 were big supporters of IMHS. This was not a group of Johnny come lately s. I think they got a great response to their call for volunteers also. Maybe a letter to the editor of the Flume is in order.

<snip> I was surprised that he quoted Cindy Manning's comment made in the Members' meeting that 99% of the members in attendance had never volunteered or been there before that evening. I know most of the members there had either/both volunteered in some way at the shelter (some in past years), donated, fostered, and/or adopted their pets from the shelter. The reporter was told this but it seems he decided not to include it in the article.

<snip>

Yeah - that comment kinda made me mad. It was a bad generalization. I know I have volunteered for the shelter a touch, and I have a vested interest in pets. I think she was just mad that they were being called on their decisions. Well, I think that was just too bad. The bottom line is the community spoke. There were a a lot of us that wondered why they had put all of those cats down. Especially w/o asking for help. To be honest - I am sorry the one gal gave up here seat instead of Cindy. That's my $.02

I chuckled when I heard someone in the meeting respond to that comment with "we put on a new roof" . I was part of that, we painted the entire shelter inside and replaced a rotten, leaky roof over a storage barn, along with installing a sink, cleaning, repairing a leaky sink, etc. It was a "Barn Raising" action, organized by one of the newest board members, Steve. http://www.pinecam.com/phpBB2/viewtopic ... 65&start=0